Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


kinophile last won the day on May 24

kinophile had the most liked content!


About kinophile

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

1,982 profile views
  1. I particularly dislike the time frames aspect. I'd prefer to Lose points exponentially as I go over the target, but still have that ability - to go past the alotted timespan by whatever I need (not just the 15mins generally allowed). I find far too many scenarios are rushing me, and I'm not an overly cautious player by any stretch. I enjoy cracking the tactical problem, not the artificial rush to do so.Most scenarios seem to almost be timed training exercises. By contrast I'm fighting a large scenario separately with 3 different players and I've deliberately given us 2.5 hours. It's a complex fight and adding a timed finish gate to it is irrelevant to the story. It might add more "tension" but it's a hell of a hard fight already. My personal preference, is all.
  2. I feel I've finally started to build an intuitive tactical library for CMBS. I've always played chess, on/off and while I'm. Not reactionary per se, I'm definitely limited in how far ahead AI think. I found CM was like that, each battle was a whole New OMG WTF HALP HALP FIRE EVERYTHING NEEOOWWWWW GO GO GO waitwherethe****iseveryone ARGH Nowadays there's less OMG and more Dammit My Pixeltrupoen farted and the Bradley 3km away smelled them, drop the 152s hard, boys. I find the best thing, as intuited above, is to pick a force and stick with them. So, (because I'm ever so slightly retarded) , I choose UKR - hardest to play and utterly helpless if you have a crappy plan. US/RUS forces can still get you out of a scrape but UKR forces are DOOOMMMED if you don't plan properly. So they're my training school, and a brutal one it is too. But I've built a little set if tactics for various events, with my actions triggered by that same note above - pattern recognition. Reading the enemy movements = survival. In CMBS if you're alive you're winning.
  3. kinophile


    Dunno about override. Time as Nd again I've seen AFVs targeting (set by me) a building or etc who get nailed by a very visible (ie dotted and fully id's by the AFV). It's maddening. The hostile AFB is more dangerous than the building but I've never seen the AFV break manual targeting.
  4. kinophile

    Bradley's fire TOWs?

    I justed posted a free days ago about my BTR4E firing both Barriers when on area fire. First it fired the autocannon, then switched to the damn ATGMs, to blow up some shrubbery. Sounds suspiciously like the TOW/Building event above.
  5. No, really. I'm burning "opsec" to post these, but Its a fairly dangerous AI bug to fire ATGMs into a hedge, on AF, with no sightings of hostile armor even available, and plenty of autocannon ammo, GL ammo available. And this asswipe fired off BOTH Barriers. Repeats on every play thorough. Never seen this before. Turn available on request. https://imgur.com/a/En70IYV
  6. Hah! Red won by sheer weight of fire and numbers.
  7. My total, above all favourite is all these good things mentioned - plus REAL Time mode. I played a QB v AI once (Brutal, as RUS) and instead of controlling/adjusting as the game went on, I instead laid out about 30 mins worth of orders. The idea was to take a truer, rear echelon approach - send the men with a plan and see what my troops TAC AI would do when the faeces met the rotating cooling device. It was fairly...brutal...but fascinating to watch the TAC AI react as it tried to achieve its orders. I gave orders for the reinforcement units, adapting to the local situation, and re-ordered any units that had fled fire, but other than t bc at I just sat back and watched the slaughter unfold. Man, modern war can cut a company apart in literally a minute. Took FOR EVER to set all the initial orders but it was worth it.
  8. I wonder is it that the AI doesnt recognise the external, freestanding walls as providing cover? ie that the courtyard effect is actually a really great place to be, as you're protected from 2+ directions AND hidden from view. Each time, the AI ignores the cover provided by the walls and runs out. Is it treating the walls as hedges? That would explain the reluctance to stay near them (ive seen inf ignore hedges and run past to buildings to escape arty fire).
  9. Very good point re Fulda Gap being way more analysed and detail planned (in RL) than BS.
  10. What was the rationale for not doing Arab Israeli wars? Danger of rapant politicization?
  11. Iron on all the way. Going God's Eye view and having 152mm whizzing past your view, down down down down SLAM! SLAM! SLAMSLAMSLAM! SLAM! SLAM! SLAMSLAM! SLAM!
  12. kinophile

    Looking for PBEM player

    I actually have a crowded plate now, sorry.
  13. kinophile

    Hypotheticals of the CMBS game narrative

    Is there not an equivalent (offensive) RUS version? 2 - 3 MRBs staged close to UKR border, ready to assault at 24 hrs notice? Even such a small advance guard, properly supported by cross-border fires, could achieve a lot. They've proved dangerous in RL with such a format.
  14. AFV/IFV combat. Multiple ATGMs whipping across a dark valley into an approaching convoy. MG fire slicing amongst the burning vehicles, picking off survivors. Autocannon slamming into BMPS desperately trying to maneuver past the burning HQ vehicle. Artillery strikes grinding a lovely tree-lined street to a shell holed, ruined mess, for blocks and blocks... Infantry advancing down a lane, ambushed by reverse-facing enemy units. Man, I've been caught by that one so often... ... This is just a ****ing great game!